I’ll take Manhattan, and give you Houston …

No doubt I am not the first to have this flash of insight – in fact, just as George Harrison* picked up My Sweet Lord from Ronnie Mack and the Chiffon’s He’s So Fine, unknowingly and with great embarrassment, I am sure I will be reminded that this idea has passed here on the blog by commenters, and at other places too.

I’ve been thinking about public hoaxes that have been pulled off during my lifetime, but there was a gigantic one that played out in the years before I was born, while dad was chauffeuring a general in the Philippines and playing clerk/typist in safety. It was called The Manhattan Project. It was an ‘eyes only’ affair that was gripped in military discipline and compartmentalization. Only a very few had a wider view of the whole project.

I had an uncle who was involved in Manhattan. He was a shop foreman for various workers at Hanford, Washington. (I’ll bet you thought I was going to say he did something really important. He did not.)

What was Manhattan about? Building the bomb, we are told. But readers here, and those who follow MM, might have serious doubts that this is the true purpose of the program. After all, we learned, various atomic tests were obvious fakes, using photography tricks to make the explosions, which were probably just stacks of TNT, look massive. But I think we can be certain that Manhattan was a huge sink for real money that could not openly be authorized for expenditure.

I will stop here on that subject, as I do not know the true purpose of Manhattan. Someone else can fill me in on that. The overarching theme was to use a fake objective as a means of hiding the real one. In that sense, it reminds me of … Apollo. The fake objective of Apollo was to land men on the moon and return them safely. So intent were the people behind Apollo to seat this objective in the public mind that they even used the fake assassination of a president in order to glorify the objective as a tribute to a fallen leader. Did JFK utter his famous words in 1961 (about putting a man on the moon and returning him safely) with full knowledge that 1) he was going to ‘die,’ and 2) that no one was lunar bound? I suspect so. (I imagine that in 1969, wherever he was, JFK watched Apollo 11 on black and white TV, just like the rest of us alive at that time.)

So Apollo resembles Manhattan in this manner, a money sink used for purposes that could not be disclosed to the public, and with a fake cover story. It was played out using military discipline and strict compartmentalization. The Playtex people really thought their space suits were going to the moon.

I have not been writing much lately, but post-surgery now my right hand is almost fully recovered, and is now getting its exercise. I am feeling a surge of nonsense that will be directed your way, dear reader.

*I regard George as by far the most talented Beatle, sweating out his music without benefit of committees of songwriters and studio musicians later ascribed to “Lennon and McCartney,” public fraudsters. George had to do it for real, suffering bad offerings on his private road to some real musical gems, his own. That is the nature of creativity, 90 percent sweat equity.,

26 thoughts on “I’ll take Manhattan, and give you Houston …”

  2. “After all, we learned, various atomic tests were obvious fakes, using photography tricks to make the explosions, which were probably just stacks of TNT, look massive. But I think we can be certain that Manhattan was a huge sink for real money that could not openly be authorized for expenditure.”

    I made this very point elsewhere earlier in this week because it now seems fairly obviously correct to me. Another commenter responded with links to all the atomic bomb “tests” that had been conducted in the 1950/60’s. It was quite a long list, but anyone can make up a list of “events” can’t they

    I believed in the existence these weapons with naive certainty, until a decade or so ago. They were the key element of the Cold War psyop after all. And that was a massive success for the owners but not at all real at the elites level. Now I think that they are far more likely to be a massive, decades long, ongoing, boondoggle. Like so many other things have been, “space” program included

    So I asked myself: what empirical evidence do we have that provides objective PROOF that atomic bombs actually exist? Photos and videos of explosions, holes in the ground after explosions, radioactive debris, and the like, just don’t cut the mustard. They could easily be conventional explosive in reality, perhaps seeded with some dirty radioactive stuff

    So is there any certain empirical proof anywhere that anyone can show me?

    If there is then, I’m not aware of it; is anyone else here?

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

      1. I think such projects were nothing more than massive taxpayer ripoffs for big industry to profit from. After all, we see the same thing with the military industrial complex: manufacture phony wars on the news as covers for gigantic money-laundering schemes that benefit weapons dealers and banks.

        Such massive projects were probably also covers for developing research into things like surveillance technology and other sophisticated innovations at their disposal. The rest of the money was then used for other projects such as psyops and hoaxes, as well as administration costs and maintenance.

        Like

        Reply

        1. Yes- These big lie projects are blinds to hide the smaller, more varied projects that cannot be justified in a so-called democracy. Add to the drain of the treasuries the concurrent brain drain, as so many brilliant minds were conned into wasting their prime on compartmentalized hoaxes. We should have the second or third generation flying cars by now, dad gummit!

          Like

          Reply

          1. It’s very sad, I know. And, of course, it doesn’t even really matter because they print all the money, anyway, so it was never ours to begin with. We’re simply “mere users” in their illusory world, as they would say.

            Like

            Reply

          2. “We should have the second or third generation flying cars by now, dad gummit!”

            Yes, and ones that aren’t solely dependent on petroleum. We had that with fine transportation vessels such as the Titanic and the Hindenburg, which was why they had to be shelved from public use by the controllers. Because they were energy efficient and cheap, they weren’t as profitable for the energy sector (esp. Big Oil), at least not initially.

            Liked by 1 person

            Reply

      2. And let’s not forget that projects such as Manhattan and Apollo were massive propaganda campaigns, some of the largest in human history only paralleled by other projects of similar size and scope like worldwide pandemics (e.g. COVID-19). They helped bolster the lies of dangerous nukes and outer space travel (although some may argue differently for the second one. Yes, I’m talking about you, Petra), thereby keeping the masses constantly perplexed in fear and amazement of their artificial surroundings.

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

      3. do you have an idea of the true purpose of Manhattan? Apollo?

        Mark, the true purpose is simply to build the mental prison us sheeple and the world order are supposed to evolve in. There is nothing more to it.

        Yes, the Americans – having firebombed to death hundreds of thousands of civilians in Japan and Germany – may have hoped to fool the Russians with their atomic bomb, and the Russians – having successfully launched their peaceful sputnik satellite – may have hoped to fool the Americans with their Gagarin spaceship. But that hope must have been faint because they know each other as sophisticated adversaries.

        On the other hand, they collude in their mutually corroborated, intertwined, even sometimes collaborative and shared hoaxes to establish the ruling narrative, not only with regard to sheeple, but also to lesser nations (prestige, power, protection racket).

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

        1. Sputnik! How well I remember. I was sitting at a drugstore soda fountain counter (miss them) when the terrifying news came over the radio. Our “cold war” arch-enemy who had the “bomb” now had a delivery system to get all of us! What to do? Of course, blame it on poor education of America’s youth compared to that of our adversary. Get rid of neighborhood schools to which healthy and happy kids could walk and get back to actual and emotional security of nearby parents. homes, families. Empty those beloved traditional neighborhood buildings into combined governmental school districts! Institute governmental controlled curricula, fast to catch up to the Sputnik launchers. Does anyone recall seeing the photo of that launchpad in Arzamas, east of the Urals? It was a wooden platform. The Soviet Union was bankrupt after WWII. Our former ally needed Wall Street’s assistance. Guess who and what came up with the great Sputnik idea. Do you really think that Russian space achievements were as real as Apollo? A fake to launch a fake to create something truly useful: FEAR. Nothing new there.

          Like

          Reply

          1. Still in denial after all these years? Americans usually are. Sputnik was real. The Russians beat you to it, as simple as that. Sputnik was not about fear. It was a perfectly peaceful accomplishment. The US gov & prop apparatus, of course, tried to instrumentalize for their own nefarious purposes. The sickness of American culture is so obvious when you look at the movie industry. Almost always the solution is violent and involves guns and other weapons. This is the mindset they want to create. A sick mindset.

            Liked by 1 person

            Reply

      4. I’ve have no better ideas than Harry’s, Tyrone and Lumi have Mark, they seem to have covered most bases to me

        I would add that the owners have always wanted dark, off the books, money. The British Crown ran the worlds drug trade, notably opium, for centuries didn’t it, they all but admit that now. Maybe it still does. Certainly the “illegal” drug business generated fabulous off books wealth for the Brit state, and made some Brit families fabulously wealthy too. The money was laundered by British banks, most notably one in Hong Kong which still performs that role to this day. This gave the Brits a massive dark wealth fund to run their nefarious geopolitical schemes. Perfidious Albion in action

        Our ex-Prime Minister, David Cameron, came from a family that made it’s money out of that HK bank too. His wife Samantha is from the Astors, a fabulously wealthy US/Brit family that made a fortune from the opium business in the far east. The Brit elite plundered the fabulous wealth of India via a private company until the mid 1800’s when they folded that company directly into the British state [East India Company]

        Subsequently, as governments became even bigger, and more central to national economies, with bigger budgets too then, the large national exchequers became an even bigger opportunity. The daddy of them all being the US. The numbers there were, and are, breath taking. Catherine Austin Fitts says that the dark money taken out of the US exchequer now runs into tens of trillions $. I’ve no idea how true that is but it could easily be

        Didn’t Rumsfeld admit that the Pentagon couldn’t account for over $2 trillion? He said that on the eve of 9/11 and everyone just shrugged the next day, more important things to worry about, like mooslim terrurrists

        Liked by 2 people

        Reply

  3. “using photography tricks to make the explosions, which were probably just stacks of TNT,”

    And it so happened they called it the Tri Ni Ty test.
    They never miss a good joke on us.

    Liked by 4 people

    Reply

  4. So they were mining these yellow rocks, said to contain uranium. The rocks and the mine tailings make the Geiger counter click. People die from cancers after sufficient exposure to the rocks or from drinking water downhill from the mine tailings. Is any of this disputed?

    This dust is scattered around Rocky Flats where, the story is, they were making nuclear triggers. I know someone quite well, who worked there when young who now has skin cancers removed regularly from her scalp and face. Her doctors have been uniformly trained to say nothing to question the absolute safety of her former occupation at what is admittedly now a superfund cleanup site.

    Missiles were built to sit in remote silos all over this state and others as well. Something sat on the tops of these missiles for years and military guys were paid to sit out there watching them for years. Now a lot of the old silos are being converted for survival bunkers for the paranoid rich.

    I read Mathis’ piece on the fakeness of the old nuke photos, and that was convincing. But it entirely fails to convince me, regarding things I have direct knowledge of, that photographic fakery means that “all existrnce of nuclear bombs is faked”. The Mathis logic took a leap too far. Some parts of this nuke story remain all to toxic and real.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    1. During the 1960’s, I too was told to hide under my tiny wooden desk at a school not very far from Columbine High School, and possibly downwind from the Rocky Flats superfund toxic cleanup site. I did not personally experience any fear regarding all this, but mostly boredom at the tedious and useless exercise.

      I had a family member who was involved in some capacity, with the weapons industry, faithfully keeping lifelong secrets. For me, all these years later, the most toxic legacy of it was the lifelong habits of things that could not be spoken of. I have come to have an abhorrence of policies or systems that require secrecy, because, in my experience, once a large pile of crap is being buried, included in it are emotions and honesty, perhaps even the ability to evaluate what was really happening.

      It is my opinion that freedom of speech was never worth signing away for any size of paycheck. The presumption that some heirarchy of secret keepers has any special honor is increasingly cast in doubt as more facts gradually leak out. It looks more and more like the systematic keeping of secrets is mostly about covering up crimes.

      Meanwhile I have observed what really looks like severe medical symptoms regarding loss of memory and cognitive ability. I have come to believe that silencing one’s own speech leads to censoring one’s own thoughts. This appears to lead to actual physical, medical decline. The compartmented mind may eventually lead to real medical issues.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

    2. The tale of nuclear “explosions” rests upon absurd selfcontradictory assumptions.
      According to their own narrative, a “critical mass” is crucial to produce the explosive chain reaction, but it’s obvious to me that the great deal of energy released by the very first atom’s fissions at the core would shatter the surrounding critical mass, stopping the chain reaction dead on its tracks. Bye Bye big explosion.
      That’s all I need to know.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

    3. They don’t mine rocks. Uranium is leeched out of the ground will chemicals. Then it’s treated with more chemicals and turned into a highly toxic gas called uranium hexaflouride before it goes thru the enrichment process. It ain’t hot rocks making people sick it’s the toxic processing.

      Like

      Reply

      1. Pitchblende is a rock, uranium ore. The rock is mined, then it is processed. Around the mines are piles of gravel and rock called mine tailings. All of this is toxic. Fools pick up rocks from old minesites to add to their collections. The Native Americans knew better than to place their villages where the mine claims were made. The fire department here has a toxic waste disposal team that occasionally finds very hot material in the homes of people, often cancer victims.

        Some actual experience here: A rock collection was purchased after the death of its owner, it turned out to be very radioactive. The wife was asked and the stuff was in a display behind his reading chair. He died of cancer.

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

    4. Yes they were mining for radioactive metals Alan, I’ve no doubt about that. The evidence for that is surely incontrovertible. Question is, what were they doing with them? It could all have gone into the nuclear power plants couldn’t it

      The power plants definitely do exist, I’ve been close to a few of them here in the UK. I’ve also known “scientists” who ran the damn things too. One was a neighbour of my parents, from their generation not mine. He was an excessive binge drinker, with truly scary stories to tell about his very senior role in a nuclear plant in Scotland. [When I was a student he encouraged me to have a career as a physicist, which I was studying at university in the ’60’s. Not a cat in hell’s chance, I abandoned that route as soon as the final exams ended]

      These scientists told me that the nuke plants definitely generate electricity, and I believe that too. France claims to generate 70% of its power by nuclear. I’ve been close to French nuclear generators as well, they definitely exist. If they don’t work then, where is all their power coming from? The French have excess electricity due to their nuclear plants, they export to UK and Germany

      I’ve no doubt that the weapons silos exist either, although I’ve never seen one. Ditto the missile casings and all the rest of the paraphernalia and personnel. Question is, did they have nuclear warheads?

      I’ve still not seen any empirical evidence for that

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

      1. Nuclear power plants are real, of course. Fission -> heat -> steam -> turbine -> generator -> electricity. Same working principle as with coal or gas burning power stations.

        In case the fission process generates too much heat, the fissible material melts, the compound disassembles, and the fission will eventually stop.

        Nothing ever explodes except as secondary effect such as the hydrogen explosions in the Westinghouse reactor in Fukushima. There was a very good Japanese documentary shown on TV in Germany and France a couple years ago, free of scaremongering, explaining, in a technical manner, how the counter-intuitive and arguably badly designed emergency shutdown system in the reactor was a major factor in its destruction.

        Like

        Reply

  6. My take is that it is to control Energy,
    they realised nuclear’s potential as a cheap and clean energy source for the masses, and had to manufacture propaganda to scare people from using it.

    You see it happened in Germany recently, who decided to shut off her remaining nuclear plants; and other countries are likely to follow suit

    (Of course, there’s also the military psy ops aspect, and money funneling)

    Like

    Reply

Leave a comment